Results 1 to 8 of 8

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1

    Default How to Contest a Red Light Camera Violation Ticket

    My question involves traffic court in the State of: California.

    Around 12:30pm on April the 28th, I ran the red light at the corner of Indiana Ave. and Van Buren Blvd. Unfortunately, I had no choice. This is a variable-time light, and I happened to catch it at the wrong time.
    I was doing 28mph in a 40mph zone, the light turned yellow, and even if I had slammed on my brakes, I would have still ended up in the intersection. I was, ironically, on the way to my mechanic less than a block away *FOR* my brakes. They started acting odd around the McKinley (corona) exit of the 91, so I got off there and took the least-traffic'd route and gave everyone a wide berth. But whatever.
    The light turned yellow while I was about a single-car-length from the crosswalk. Out of reflex, I *ATTEMPTED* to apply the brakes, but with diminished braking, that obviously didn't work, so I resumed course. The light was red for (if I'm reading the picture correctly) for less than 1 second at the point I entered the intersection. My speed was still 28mph. The video they claim is available is not. It would show my failed attempt at braking and the duration of the yellow light would just barely be in frame. I believe I just had no time to react.

    I have 0 violations in this state. I'm a good driver, believe it or not, with more than half a million miles under my belt. I had a mechanical failure and did my best to make it safely to my destination to have that issue rectified. I have the invoice for the repairs -- same date, about an hour later. Do I have *ANY* defense here at all? I simply cannot afford the outrageous $500 ticket imposed by this ludicrous state.

    Is there some kind of law where I have to be presented something like this *IN PERSON* by an officer?

    How can I contest this? Sorry if this was a little bloated and not concise; I'm really flustered at the moment. Apologies.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: Red Light Camera Violation in Riverside, Ca. How to Contest

    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    I was, ironically, on the way to my mechanic less than a block away *FOR* my brakes. They started acting odd around the McKinley (corona) exit of the 91, ... The light turned yellow while I was about a single-car-length from the crosswalk. Out of reflex, I *ATTEMPTED* to apply the brakes, but with diminished braking, that obviously didn't work, so I resumed course. The light was red for (if I'm reading the picture correctly) for less than 1 second at the point I entered the intersection.
    So realistically, you couldn't stop, not because of yellow phase timing, not because the light is on a variable timer and you caught it at the wrong time, but simply because you did not have sufficient braking power!

    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    The video they claim is available is not.
    The video is not a requirement. It is simply icing on the cake. The photos are required by law. Those, I assume are sufficient to identify you as the driver and show your vehicle at the moment the leading edge crossed the limit line, along with a showing that the light was in its red phase.


    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    It would show my failed attempt at braking and the duration of the yellow light would just barely be in frame.
    VC 41101.
    (a) Whenever a traffic sign or traffic control device is placed in a position approximately conforming to the requirements of this code, it shall be presumed to have been placed by the official act or direction of lawful authority, unless the contrary is established by competent evidence.
    (b) Any sign or traffic control device placed pursuant to this code and purporting to conform to the lawful requirements pertaining to it shall be presumed to comply with the requirements of this code unless the contrary is established by competent evidence.

    That basically says the signal (a traffic control device), was placed by the city, is presumed to be in working order, as required by law, unless you, the defendant, can rebut that presumption by indisputable evidence.

    Quote Quoting Page 866 of the 2012 CA-MUTCD
    The minimum yellow change interval shall be in accordance with Table 4D-102(CA). The posted speed limit, or the prima facie speed limit established by the California Vehicle Code (CVC) shall be used for determination of the minimum yellow change interval for the through traffic movement.


    So at 40mph, the yellow phase should be set to 3.9 seconds... Now you can contact the city, request the engineering survey for the intersection and double check what the timing is set to! If it is less that 3.9, you may have an argument, if it is at or higher that 3.9 then you're stuck digging for more.

    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    I believe I just had no time to react.
    So you're changing your answer then? It had nothing to do with mechanical failure and low, or almost no stopping power... You simply had no time to react?

    Why is that?

    You haven't really looked into the timing yet, so that is not a sure thing!


    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    I have 0 violations in this state. I'm a good driver, believe it or not, with more than half a million miles under my belt.
    Your previous driving record is not even a valid start for a defense. If everyone who starts out with a clean driving record gets to keep their clean driving record by arguing that they have a clean driving record, then ALL of us will ALWAYS have a clean driving record because we all start with a clean driving record!

    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    I had a mechanical failure and did my best to make it safely to my destination to have that issue rectified.
    Don't go there either as this is the response I expect you'd get from the court: "What if that was a child that ran out in the middle of the roadway? Would trying your best be good enough? NO!"

    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    Do I have *ANY* defense here at all?
    I'm not seeing one at all!

    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    I simply cannot afford the outrageous $500 ticket imposed by this ludicrous state.
    That's the same fine that applies to everyone! I don't know if Riverside offers community service but that is one route you can go, you can make payments, you can request an extension and start saving... You may see a slight reduction at the arraignment but I can't assure you of anything. Alternatively, you can get greedy and hope the officer won't show... At that point ion time you lost out on any possible reduction simply because the judge now has little say so, he must impose the full statutory fine per VC 42001.15 for a conviction (different than that for a guilty plea)!

    Quote Quoting endybajr
    View Post
    Is there some kind of law where I have to be presented something like this *IN PERSON* by an officer?
    Nope... Service is presumed complete if notice is mailed to the registered owner's address on record with the DMV at the time the citation is issued!

  3. #3

    Default Re: Red Light Camera Violation in Riverside, Ca. How to Contest

    I do not see an Answer to the basic question posed by the OP

    Quote : " How to Contest a Red Light Camera Violation Ticket "

    Short answer ...

    the Remedy lies in the 6th Amendment

    CONFRONTATION

    ''The primary object of the constitutional provision in question was to prevent depositions of ex parte affidavits . . . being used against the prisoner in lieu of a personal examination and cross- examination of the witness in which the accused has an opportunity not only of testing the recollection and sifting the conscience of the witness, but of compelling him to stand face to face with the jury in order that they may look at him, and judge by his demeanor upon the stand and the manner in which he gives his testimony whether he is worthy of belief'' 145 The right of confrontation is ''[o]ne of the fundamental guarantees of life and liberty . . . long deemed so essential for the due protection of life and liberty that it is guarded against legislative and judicial action by provisions in the Constitution of the United States and in the constitutions of most if not of all the States composing the Union.'' 146 Before 1965, when the Court held the right to be protected against state abridgment, 147 it had little need to clarify the relationship between the right of confrontation and the hearsay rule, 148 inasmuch as its supervisory powers over the inferior federal courts permitted it to control the admission of hearsay on this basis. 149 Thus, on the basis of the Confrontation Clause, it had concluded that evidence given at a preliminary hearing could not be used at the trial if the absence of the witness was attributable to the negligence of the prosecution, 150 but that if a witness' absence had been procured by the defendant, testimony given at a previous trial on a different indictment could be used at the subsequent trial. 151 It had also recognized the admissibility of dying declarations 152 and of testimony given at a former trial by a witness since deceased. 153 The prosecution was not permitted to use a judgment of conviction against other defendants on charges of theft in order to prove that the property found in the possession of defendant now on trial was stolen.

    in other words---

    the "Ticket " is uncorroborated , un Verified ....Hearsay

    and is not admissible in a real Court

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: Red Light Camera Violation in Riverside, Ca. How to Contest

    Quote Quoting J. Alfred Braun
    View Post
    I do not see an Answer to the basic question posed by the OP

    Quote : " How to Contest a Red Light Camera Violation Ticket "

    Short answer ...

    the Remedy lies in the 6th Amendment

    CONFRONTATION

    ''The primary object of the constitutional provision in question was to prevent depositions of ex parte affidavits . . . being used against the prisoner in lieu of a personal examination and cross- examination of the witness in which the accused has an opportunity not only of testing the recollection and sifting the conscience of the witness, but of compelling him to stand face to face with the jury in order that they may look at him, and judge by his demeanor upon the stand and the manner in which he gives his testimony whether he is worthy of belief'' 145 The right of confrontation is ''[o]ne of the fundamental guarantees of life and liberty . . . long deemed so essential for the due protection of life and liberty that it is guarded against legislative and judicial action by provisions in the Constitution of the United States and in the constitutions of most if not of all the States composing the Union.'' 146 Before 1965, when the Court held the right to be protected against state abridgment, 147 it had little need to clarify the relationship between the right of confrontation and the hearsay rule, 148 inasmuch as its supervisory powers over the inferior federal courts permitted it to control the admission of hearsay on this basis. 149 Thus, on the basis of the Confrontation Clause, it had concluded that evidence given at a preliminary hearing could not be used at the trial if the absence of the witness was attributable to the negligence of the prosecution, 150 but that if a witness' absence had been procured by the defendant, testimony given at a previous trial on a different indictment could be used at the subsequent trial. 151 It had also recognized the admissibility of dying declarations 152 and of testimony given at a former trial by a witness since deceased. 153 The prosecution was not permitted to use a judgment of conviction against other defendants on charges of theft in order to prove that the property found in the possession of defendant now on trial was stolen.

    in other words---

    the "Ticket " is uncorroborated , un Verified ....Hearsay

    and is not admissible in a real Court
    Sadly, you're confusing the "ticket" which gets "filed" in court with "evidence" which is "admitted" with the court.
    The "ticket" is not "evidence" so how can it be "hearsay"?
    The ticket is merely the charging document... The evidence, well that comes later!

    But what you've posted here makes little sense and obviously, falls short of answering anything remotely close to "how to Contest a Red Light Camera Violation Ticket?"

    Little details but until you get them right, you're bound to get yourself -or anyone who follows your advice- into deeper trouble!

  5. #5

    Default Re: Red Light Camera Violation in Riverside, Ca. How to Contest

    Quote Quoting That Guy
    View Post
    Sadly, you're confusing the "ticket" which gets "filed" in court with "evidence" which is "admitted" with the court.
    The ticket is merely the charging document... The evidence, well that comes later!

    But what you've posted here makes little sense and obviously, falls short of answering anything remotely close to "how to Contest a Red Light Camera Violation Ticket?"

    !
    I hope my keyboard is still good, after I just spilled coffee all over...

    because I was laughing so hard ...

    You ... are stating that there is " evidence " to enter in this Case.?? bwaaaahahaha ...

    as well as a Charging Instrument, Verification, Information ..???

    that " ticket " meets NONE of those descriptions ..

    You know it

    I know it

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: Red Light Camera Violation in Riverside, Ca. How to Contest

    Quote Quoting J. Alfred Braun
    View Post
    I hope my keyboard is still good, after I just spilled coffee all over...

    because I was laughing so hard ...

    You ... are stating that there is " evidence " to enter in this Case.?? bwaaaahahaha ...

    as well as a Charging Instrument, Verification, Information ..???

    that " ticket " meets NONE of those descriptions ..

    You know it

    I know it
    Oh, the keyboard still works... It does seem however that there is a defective brain behind it!

    Ignorance is bliss.... And you must be laughing at the silliness you're posting.

    For one, I did not refer to it as a "charging instrument" nor did I discuss "verification" or "information"... But I do understand that you and your type don't understand what's going on and the only way you can get a word in edge wise is if you memorize this crap and recite it as a script!

    I will simply post this one vehicle code section, which should prove you have no clue what you're talking about...

    Anything else that you post from here on is meaningless, but still knock yourself out:

    California Vehicle Code Section 40518.
    (a) Whenever a written notice to appear has been issued by a peace officer or by a qualified employee of a law enforcement agency on a form approved by the Judicial Council for an alleged violation of Section 22451, or, based on an alleged violation of Section 21453, 21455, or 22101 recorded by an automated enforcement system pursuant to Section 21455.5 or 22451, and delivered by mail within 15 days of the alleged violation to the current address of the registered owner of the vehicle on file with the department, with a certificate of mailing obtained as evidence of service, an exact and legible duplicate copy of the notice when filed with the magistrate shall constitute a complaint to which the defendant may enter a plea. Preparation and delivery of a notice to appear pursuant to this section is not an arrest.

    I realize its difficult for you to understand these code sections so this is what this one says: The "ticket" ---> also known as ----> Notice to Appear ----> and if/when it is completed as described above ---> and when filed in court ----> constitutes a "complaint"!

    To summarize, "a ticket" is a "complaint"!

    Now, if that is difficult for you to understand, you're on your own! I cannot simplify it any more for you!

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Are Red Light Camera Violation Tickets Valid in Los Angeles
    By That Girl in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-26-2011, 10:39 AM
  2. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Red Light Camera Violation Ticket Lists Both Vehicle Owners
    By Huevos in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-02-2011, 10:59 PM
  3. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Red Light Camera Right on Red Violation with No Posted No Turn on Red Light Signs
    By Hryczhoi in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-12-2011, 07:41 PM
  4. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Red Light Camera Violation Ticket Sent to the Owner, Not the Driver
    By miasowens in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-31-2010, 12:32 PM
  5. Red Light Camera Ticket - Contest or Not
    By metooblam in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-11-2010, 10:01 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources